Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418

3rd International Conference on Materials Processing and Characterisation (ICMPC 2014)

Mechanical behaviour of glass and carbon fibre reinforced

composites at varying strain rates and temperatures
C.Elanchezhian1 *, B.Vijaya Ramnath2, J.Hemalatha3

1*
Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sri Sai Ram Engineering College, Chennai, 600044 , India
2
Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Saveetha Engineering College, Chennai, 600044, India ,
3
Assistant professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering,Mailam Engineering College, Mailam,604304, India

Abstract
The usage of high performance polymeric composites is a valuable alternative to conventional materials due to their
high mechanical properties, stiffness to weight ratio and damage tolerance. The Mechanical property of epoxy matrices can be
influenced by modifying the molecular architecture and structure, thereby increasing the crosslink density to generate high
stiffness and strength. In many of these practical situations, the structures are prone to high impact loads. Material and structural
response vary significantly under impact loading conditions. This paper deals with the fabrication and investigation of fiber
composites and compares it with GFRP and CFRP used separately. Mechanical behaviour of the composite is obtained by testing
the composite laminates for tensile (at varying strain rates and temperatures), flexural (at varying strain rates) and impact. The
composite is manufactured by hand layup process. It is found that the CFRP composite has better properties than the GFRP in
tensile and flexural. The internal structure of the composite is observed under scanning electron microscope (SEM) and the
fractures, voids and fiber delaminating are analyzed.

©
© 2014
2014Elsevier Ltd. This
The Authors. is an open
Published byaccess article
Elsevier Ltd.under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the Gokaraju Rangaraju Institute of Engineering and Technology (GRIET).
Selection and peer review under responsibility of the Gokaraju Rangaraju Institute of Engineering and Technology (GRIET)
Keywords: Mechanical properties, mechanical testing, CFRP, GFRP, Scanning Electron Microscope.

1. Introduction
A composite is a material made by combining two or more dissimilar materials in such a way that the resultant
material is endowed with properties superior to any of its parental ones. Fiber-reinforced composites, owing to their
superior properties, are usually applied in different fields like defence, aerospace, engineering applications, sports
goods, etc. Nowadays, FRP composites have gained increasing interest due to their eco-friendly properties. A lot of
work has been done by researchers based on these FRP composite.
_____________
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: vijayaramnath.mech@sairam.edu.in

2211-8128 © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/).
Selection and peer review under responsibility of the Gokaraju Rangaraju Institute of Engineering and Technology (GRIET)
doi:10.1016/j.mspro.2014.07.120
1406 C. Elanchezhian et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418

Fibres such as glass and carbon are abundant and renewable, lightweight, with low density and high
toughness. Fibres such as glass and carbon have the potential to be used as a replacement for traditional
reinforcement materials in composites for applications which requires high strength to weight ratio and further
weight reduction. Glass and Carbon fiber has been an important fabric in the industry due to its lustre and
mechanical properties. The interfacial bond strength has to be sufficient for load to be transferred from the matrix to
the fibres if the composite is stronger than the unreinforced matrix. While concerned with the toughness of the
composites, the interface must not be so strong and allow toughening mechanisms such as debonding the fiber pull-
out to take place. Volume fraction plays a major role in determining properties. The volume fraction is generally
regarded as the single most important parameter influencing the composite properties. Homogeneity is also an
important characteristic that determines the extent to which a representative volume of the material may differ in
physical and mechanical properties from the average properties of the material.
Ochola et al and Mahmood Shokrieh et al [16, 13] worked on strain rate behaviour of glass and carbon fibre
reinforced composites at varying strain rates and temperatures. Material and structural response vary significantly
under impact loading conditions as compared to Quasi-static loading. The strain rate sensitivity of both carbon fiber
reinforced polymer (CFRP) and glass fiber reinforced polymer (GFRP) are studied by testing single laminate
configuration. The dynamic responses of composite materials under dynamic loading at various strain rates, special
testing machines are needed. Most of the researches in this field are focused on applying real loading and gripping
boundary conditions on the testing specimens.
Gilat et al [5] investigated on Experimental study of strain-rate-dependent behaviour of carbon/epoxy
composite. The strain rate dependent behaviour of IM7/977-2 carbon/epoxy matrix composite in tension is studied
by testing the resin and various laminate configurations at different strain rates. Tensile tests have been conducted
with a hydraulic machine at quasi-static strain rates of approximately 10-5 s-1 and intermediate strain rates of about 1
s-1. Mahmood Shokrieh et al and Reis et al [12, 18] worked on Tension behaviour of unidirectional glass/epoxy
composites under different strain rates. The behaviour of unidirectional glass fiber reinforced polymeric composites
under uni-axial loading is determined at quasi-static and intermediate strain rates of 0.001–100s-1.The composite
presents an elasto–viscoplastic behaviour – the rate dependency only occurs for loading levels above a given
elasticity limit. Strain rate strongly affects the ultimate tensile strength and the modulus of elasticity is almost
insensitive to it while temperature only influences the modulus.
Zubaidy et al [6] developed Mechanical Behaviour of Normal Modulus Carbon Fibre Reinforced Polymer
(CFRP) and Epoxy under Impact Tensile Loads. The mechanical properties of unidirectional normal modulus
carbon fibre reinforced polymer (CFRP) sheet and Araldite 420 epoxy under quasi-static and medium impact tensile
loads. It is found that both the CFRP sheet and Araldite resin were strain rate dependent. Lal Ninan et al [15]
developed a Use of split Hopkinson pressure bar for testing off-axis composites. This work attempted to characterize
the high strain rate behaviour of composites using off-axis composite specimens.Hosur et al [10] investigated on
High strain rate compression of carbon/epoxy laminate composites. The response of carbon/epoxy laminated
composites under high strain rate compression loading is considered using a modified Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar
(SHPB).
Yuan Qinlu et al [19] worked on Quasi-static and dynamic compressive fracture behaviour of carbon/carbon
composites. To understand the dynamic compressive fracture behaviour of carbon/carbon composites, their
compressive behaviour was investigated at a strain rate of 500/s using a modified split Hopkinson pressure bar.Peijs
et al and Zhen Wang et al [17, 20] worked on the influence of strain rate and temperature on modulus, strength and
work of fracture of high performance polyethylene fibers and composites. The impact energy of these laminates
were described quantitatively in terms of fibre, matrix and delamination effects by combining the tensile test results
on fibres and unidirectional composites with fracture toughness experiments on laminates.
Marcus schobig et al [14] investigated on Glass fiber reinforced polypropylene and polybutene-1 materials
in a high speed tensile test. The glass fiber content especially the strain rate, influence the material behaviour. In this
case, the stress strain behaviour, the tensile strength and the fracture appearance. Hao Yan et al [7] worked on
compression-after-Impact failure in woven fiber reinforced composites. Compression failure of composite structures
previously damaged by an impact event is due to the propagation of impact induced damage mechanisms such as
interlaminar debonding, constituent, micro cracking, sub laminate buckling as well as the interactions between these
mechanisms. Alcock et al [1] worked on the effect of temperature and strain rate on the impact performance of
 C. Elanchezhian et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418 1407

recyclable all-polypropylene composites. the relationship between the impact resistance of all-PP composite
laminates based on these highly oriented co-extruded PP tapes, and the temperature and velocity of impact. Unlike
isotropic PP, the highly oriented nature of all-PP composites means that a significant influence of glass transition
temperature is not observed and so all-PP composites retain high impact energy absorption even at low
temperatures.
Ferreira et al [4] developed on Static and fatigue behaviour of glass-fibre-reinforced polypropylene
composites. The composite was manufactured with a fibre volume fraction V f of 0.338. The effect of layer design on
the static and fatigue performance was investigated. The S-N curves, the rise in the temperature of the specimens
during the tests and the loss of stiffness. The loss of stiffness was related to the rise of temperature and stress release
observed in the material. Koerber et al [11] High strain rate characterization of unidirectional carbon-epoxy IM7-
8552 in transverse compression and in-plane shear using digital Image correlation. Quasi-static and dynamic
experiments at strain rates up to 350 s-1 was performed with end-loaded, rectangular off-axis compression and
transverse compression specimens. Cantwell et al [3] worked on to identify the fundamental parameters determining
the impact resistance of continuous fibre-reinforced composite materials. The effect of varying the properties of the
fibre, matrix and interphase are examined as well as the role of target geometry and loading rate on the dynamic
response of these materials

2.0 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

2.1 Materials: Glass Fibre

The composites used today in the industry are made of glass fibers. In fiber glass products the resin or 'matrix'
transfers the shear and the glass fibers resist the tensile and compressive loads. Fiber glass composite materials
exhibit significant reduction in the weight than the composites made of steel or timber. Fiberglass is a lightweight,
extremely strong, and robust material. The material is typically far less brittle, and the raw materials are much less
expensive. Its bulk strength and weight properties are also very favorable when compared to metals, and it can be
easily formed using molding processes. Common applications of fiberglass include high performance aircrafts
(gliders), boats, automobiles, baths, water tanks, roofing, pipes and cladding.

2.1.1 Carbon Fibre

Carbon fiber is a material consisting of extremely thin fibers about 0.005-0.010 mm in diameter consists of
carbon atoms. The carbon atoms are bonded together in microscopic crystals that are more or less aligned parallel to
the long axis of the fiber. The crystal alignment makes the fiber very strong for its size. Several carbon fibres are
twisted together to form a yarn, which may be used by itself or woven into a fabric. Carbon fiber has many different
weave patterns and can be combined with a plastic resin and wood or moulded to form composite materials such as
carbon fiber reinforced polymer (also reference as carbon fiber) to provide a high strength to weight ratio material.
The density of carbon fiber is also considerable lower than the density of steel, making it ideal for applications
requiring low weight. The properties of carbon fiber such as high tensile strength, low weight, and low thermal
expansion make it very popular in aerospace, civil engineering, military, and motorsports along with other
competition sports.

2.1.2. Resin and Hardener

Epoxy resin is used to give great binding properties between the fibre layers to form the matrix. The Epoxy
resin used at room temperature is LY 556. Hardener (HY 951) is employed to improve the interfacial adhesion and
impart strength to the composite. A resin and hardener mixture of 10:1 is used to obtain optimum matrix
composition.

2.2 Fabrication Procedure for specimen:

The composite material is fabricated by using hand layup method. Resin and hardener mixture is applied for every
layer. The ratio of mixing resin and hardener is 10:1. The weight ratio of polymer and fibre is shown in Table-1.The
mould surface is cleaned with Acetone and the releasing agent (wax) is applied. A thin layer of resin is applied on
the mould. The GFRP are then completely filled with epoxy resin and rolled to squeeze the entrapped air and to
1408 C. Elanchezhian et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418

uniformly spread the mixture. In this way the layers of glass fiber are placed one over the other to obtain the
required thickness. Now a load of 8-10 kilograms is applied for a curing period of 8-12 hours on the mould. This
gives the required composite laminates which can be made to required size by cutting the sides. Similarly the same
procedure is used for preparing CFRP laminate.

Calculation for Weight Ratio of polymer and fiber:

Table 1. Weight Ratio of polymer and fiber
Sl.No Fiber Thickness of Weight of Fibre Weight of polymer Weight of
fiber (Wf) (Wp) hardener
(gram)
(mm) (gram) (gram)

1 Glass 3.5 149.9 300 30.0

2 Glass 4.5 182 364 36.4
3 Carbon 3.5 136 136 13.6
4 Carbon 4.5 176.8 177 17.7

(1) Volume of composite = 25x20x0.3 = 150 cc

(2) Weight of Polymer = 149.9 x 2 = 300g
(3) Weight of hardener = 300 / 10 = 30.0 g

3.0 Testing of Composites

3.1. Tensile test
The tensile test of the composite was done in accordance with ASTM D638 and specimen is shown in figure 1. Each
composite specimen was prepared by marking the required dimensions and cut with the help of a saw cutter. A
universal testing machine was used to carry out the test. This test was done for 8 specimens of glass fiber and 8
specimens of carbon fiber at varying strain rates (2.5, 1.5) and temperature (35 oC, 70oC) to get an average
mechanical properties. The thickness of the composite was measured at the point of failure by testing along with the
maximum displacement of the composite at break load. The specimen was placed in the grip of the tensile testing
machine and the test is performed by applying tension until it undergoes fracture. The corresponding load and
displacement obtained are plotted on the graphs.

Figure1: Tensile test specimen

3.2. Flexural test
The composite materials are now cut by using a saw cutter to get the dimensions as per the ASTM D790
(50.8mmx12.7mm) standards as shown in figure-2. The 3-point flexure test is the most common flexural test for
composite materials. Specimen deflection is usually measured by the cross-head position. Test results include
flexural strength and displacement. The testing process involves, the placing of the test specimen in the universal
testing machine and applying force on it until it fractures and breaks. The Flexural test were performed on the same
universal testing machine, using the 3 point bending fixture according to the ASTM D790 with the cross head speed
of 2mm/min
 C. Elanchezhian et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418 1409

Figure 2: Flexural test specimen

3.3. Impact test

An impact testing machine with Charpy arrangement is employed to perform the test. It is done as per the ASTM
D256 standards. The specimen is subjected to an impact blow by the pendulum until it fractures and the
corresponding energy absorbed by the material is noted. This test gives the maximum energy that a material can
absorb.
4.0 Results and discussions
4.1. Tensile properties
The composite specimens like GFRP and CFRP at varying thickness are tested in the universal testing
machine at varying strain rates and temperatures to find the tensile properties. A sample graph showing Load vs.
Displacement of CFRP and GFRP is shown in figure.3 to 18.
The various mechanical properties of the fabricated composite (CFRP and GFRP) are summarized in the
table 2 to 5 for better comparison. It is clearly seen that the tensile strength of the CFRP composite is high. CFRP
has the maximum value of tensile stress as 913.861N/mm2 and the corresponding elongation as 4.761% at strain rate
of 2.5mm/min at 35oC .The maximum displacement observed during the testing was 1.000mm. The ultimate load at
which the sample breaks is 36262 N (36.262 KN). The GFRP sample has the maximum value of tensile stress as
114.149N/mm2 and the corresponding elongation as 5.476% at strain rate of 1.5mm/min at 35 oC. The maximum
displacement observed during the testing was 2.300 mm. The ultimate load at which the sample breaks is 5744 N
(5.744 KN).From the results of the tensile test, it can be concluded that the CFRP composite is well performing
compared with other types of composites.

TENSILE TEST RESULT:

Carbon Fiber Samples for 35oC

Fig- 3-Sample-1 Strain Rating 2.5mm/min Fig-4-Sample-2 Strain Rating 1.5mm/min

1410 C. Elanchezhian et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418

Fig-5-Sample-3 Strain Rating 2.5mm/min Fig-6-Sample-4 Strain Rating 1.5mm/min

Carbon Fiber Samples for 70oC

Fig-7-Sample-1 Strain Rating 2.5mm/min Fig-8-Sample-2 Strain Rating 1.5mm/min

Fig-9-Sample-3 Strain Rating 2.5mm/min Fig-10-Sample-4 Strain Rating 1.5mm/min

 C. Elanchezhian et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418 1411

Glass Fiber Samples for 35oC

Fig-11-Sample-1 Strain Rating 2.5mm/min Fig-12-Sample-2 Strain Rating 1.5mm/min

Fig-13-Sample-3 Strain Rating 2.5mm/min Fig-14-Sample-4 Strain Rating 1.5mm/min

Glass Fiber Samples for 70oC

Fig-15-Sample-1 Strain Rating 2.5mm/min Fig-16-Sample-2 Strain Rating 1.5 mm/min

1412 C. Elanchezhian et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418

Fig-17-Sample-3 Strain Rating 2.5 mm/min Fig-18-Sample-4 Strain Rating 1.5 mm/min

Table-2 Carbon fibre tensile test at 35oC

Sample no Thickness Strain Ultimate Maximum Breaking Elongation

(mm) Rate stress Displacement load (%)
(mm/min) (N/mm2) (mm) (N)
1 4.5 2.5 625.958 0.700 34648 2.976
2 4.5 1.5 761.637 0.800 41724 2.381
3 3.5 2.5 913.861 1.000 36262 4.761
4 3.5 1.5 901.515 2.400 49980 5.952

Table-3 Carbon fibre tensile test at 70oC

Sample Thickness Strain Rate Ultimate Maximum Breaking Elongation

no (mm) (mm/min) stress Displacement load (%)
(N/mm2) (mm) (N)
1 4.5 2.5 643.483 0.700 36694 12.143
2 4.5 1.5 418.401 0.700 24853 13.690
3 3.5 2.5 797.154 0.900 33608 8.571
4 3.5 1.5 587.850 0.700 33625 11.905

Table-4 Glass fibre tensile test at 35oC

Sample no Thickness Strain Rate Ultimate Maximum Breaking Elongation

(mm) (mm/min) stress Displacement load (%)
(N/mm2) (mm) (N)
1 4.5 2.5 103.775 2.400 4838 7.143
2 4.5 1.5 114.149 2.300 5744 5.476
3 3.5 2.5 114.013 2.200 6798 7.5
4 3.5 1.5 109.100 2.700 6726 7.381

Table-5 Glass fibre tensile test at 70oC

Sample Thickness Strain Rate Ultimate Maximum Breaking Elongation

no (mm) (mm/min) stress Displacement load (%)
(N/mm2) (mm) (N)
1 4.5 2.5 11.759 2.700 508 8.214
2 4.5 1.5 11.111 3.600 540 6.309
3 3.5 2.5 9.939 2.200 586 6.5
4 3.5 1.5 14.423 4.800 842 7.381
 C. Elanchezhian et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418 1413

4.2. Flexural Properties

A typical load-displacement curve for two different types of composites is shown in the figure 19 to 26. It is seen
that all the curves increase linearly with respect to displacement up to the maximum flexural load and then decreases
since breakage takes place. The maximum flexural strength is observed in carbon fibre. The flexural resistance
shown by other composites are shown in table 6 and7. The adhesion between the CFRP and the epoxy matrix is
better than the GFRP and epoxy matrix composites.
The flexural modulus of the composite is found from the linear portion of the curve by determining
the load and its corresponding displacement which shows carbon fibre has the highest flexural modulus when
compared with the GFRP composites. The comparison between different composites like break load and
displacement are shown in figure 19 to 26. The CFRP sample has maximum flexural strength of is 31.578N/mm 2 at
strain rate of 2.5mm/min.The maximum displacement during the testing was 6.100mm.The ultimate load at which
the sample breaks is 1785 N (1.785 KN). The GFRP sample has the maximum flexural strength of 9 N/mm 2 at strain
rate of 1.5 mm/min.The maximum displacement during the testing was 5.700mm.The ultimate load at which the
sample breaks is 540 N(0.54 KN). After the maximum flexural load point, the graph decreases since the fibres tend
to pull out from the composite at the breaking point. This leads to random increase and decrease of curve in graph
before it finally breaks.

FLEXURAL TEST RESULT:

Glass fibre samples at 35oC

Fig-19-Sample-1 Strain Rating 2.5 mm/min Fig-20-Sample-2 Strain Rating 1.5 mm/min

Fig-21-Sample-3 Strain Rating 2.5 mm/min Fig-22-Sample-4 Strain Rating 1.5 mm/min
1414 C. Elanchezhian et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418

Carbon fiber samples at 35oC

Fig-23-Sample-5 Stain Rating 2.5 mm/min Fig-24-Sample-6 Strain Rating 1.5 mm/min

Fig-25-Sample-7 Strain Rating 2.5 mm/min Fig-26-Sample-8 Strain Rating 1.5 mm/min

Table-6 Glass fibre flexural test at 35oC

Sample no Thickness Strain Rate Ultimate Maximum Breaking

(mm) (mm/min) stress Displacement load
(N/mm2) (mm) (N)
1 4.5 2.5 8 6.300 475
2 4.5 1.5 9 5.700 540
3 3.5 2.5 6 8.300 300
4 3.5 1.5 6 7.900 285

Table-7 Carbon fibre flexural test at 35oC

Sample no Thickness Strain Rate Ultimate Maximum Breaking

(mm) (mm/min) stress Displacement load
(N/mm2) (mm) (N)
1 4.5 2.5 31.578 6.100 1785
2 4.5 1.5 29 6.300 1520
3 3.5 2.5 26 5.500 1135
4 3.5 1.5 25 6.700 1085
 C. Elanchezhian et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418 1415

4.3. Impact test:

The impact test is conducted for analysing the impact capability of CFRP and GFRP composites. The loss in energy
is found using charpy impact test machine. Impact strength of CFRP composite is 11J which is quite high when
compared with the GFRP composite.

Table-8 Impact test

Sample. Fiber Thickness Width Actual Actual Actual Averag

No mm mm energy energy energy e
absorbed absorbed absorbed Actual
(K1) (K2) (K3) energy
Joules Joules Joules absorb
ed
(K)
Joules
1 Glass 4.5 16.00 8 6 4 6
2 Glass 3.5 14.5 4 2 2 2.667
3 Carbon 4.5 16.7 18 8 8 11.333
4 Carbon 3.5 15.6 4 4 4 4

Table-9 Impact test

Sample. No Fiber Thickness Width Area Average Impact

mm mm (a) Actual Strength
mm2 energy (IK)
absorbed Ik=K/a
(K) J/mm2
Joules

1 Glass 4.5 16.00 72 6 0.0833

2 Glass 3.5 14.5 50.75 2.667 0.0526

3 Carbon 4.5 16.7 75.15 11.333 0.1508

4 Carbon 3.5 15.6 54.6 4 0.0733

The energy absorbed by the each specimen when it is impacted by a heavy blow is summarized in the table 8 and 9.
It can be seen that the Carbon fiber has very high impact strength when compared to Glass fiber. The energy
absorbed by the carbon fibre is 11 J.
5.0 Morphological Analysis (Scanning electron microscopy analysis)
Morphological analysis was done using Scanning Electron Microscope. The surface characteristics of the composite
material were studied through SEM after conducting tests. The samples taken from each test were dried and coated
with 15–20 nm thick layer of gold with an Ion - Sputter coater device. Subsequently the specimens were inspected
by a scanning electron microscope. The interfacial adhesion between matrix and the fibre is clearly seen from
scanning electron micrographs.
The SEM micrograph of the GFRP and CFRP composite is shown in figure 27 to 30. Even though the
manufacturing of the composite was done with care, it is seen that there is intra fibre delamination predominantly
present in the fibres which reduces the strength of the composite. Since, the loading for tensile test is done in
horizontal direction, the fibres are found to be damaged in that direction more than the other direction.
1416 C. Elanchezhian et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418

Figure 27 and 29 shows the CFRP and GFRP fibre composite which were subjected to tensile testing. The
adhesion is good and there are few defects like air bubbles and fibre draw-out. The smooth surface seen is the resin
and the irregular surface is fibre. Due to the high strength of carbon fibres, they have undergone individual
breakage, giving it very high strength. The effective stress transfer in the tensile direction between the fibre and
matrix is supported by the high stress values obtained in the test.

Figure 27: SEM image of GFRP Figure 28: SEM image of

composite after tensile test GFRP after flexural testing

Figure 29: SEM image of CFRP Figure 30: SEM image of CFRP Composite
Composite after tensile test after flexural test

Figure 28 and 30 shows the SEM micrograph of a flexural fractured specimen of CFRP and GFRP. Inter- phase
delamination is found at the cross-section of a composite due to flexural load applied. Presence of voids in the
specimen is found to be minimal due to uniform load applied on it. The crack propagates through the natural fibres
rather than the glass fibre and causes failure. Flexural strength values also indicate that there is very little stress
transfer from the matrix to the fibre and hence very low values.
 C. Elanchezhian et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418 1417

6.0 Conclusion

In this work, fibre composites are fabricated with fibres like CFRP and GFRP. Their mechanical properties like
tensile strength (at varying strain rates and temperatures), flexural strength (at varying strain rates) and impact
strength are investigated and from the results obtained, the following conclusions were drawn.
x The tensile strength of CFRP composite is the relatively more than GFRP composite and it has a value of
36.262 KN.
x The percentage elongation of CFRP in tensile testing is found to be less than that of the GFRP composite.
Therefore, the GFRP composite withstands more strain before failure in tensile testing than the CFRP
composite.
x The flexural strength of CFRP composite is the relatively more than GFRP composite and it has an ultimate
load value of 1.785KN.
x Impact strength of CFRP composite is 11J which is quite high when compared with the GFRP composite
whose impact values are 6J and 4J respectively.
x The effect of the different tests are studied and the internal structures of composites have been investigated
using SEM (Scanning Electron Microscope) and it is found that the orientation angles of fibres play an
important role in the mechanical behaviour of CFRP and GFRP composite. SEM micrographs of the tensile
and flexural tested specimens help to predict fibre failure, cause of voids and fibre pullout during loading
condition. It also gives an idea about the crack propagation in the composite.

From the above experimental data, it can be concluded that the Carbon Fibre Reinforced
composites is stronger than the Glass Fibre Reinforced composites. Hence, it can be extensively used for
automotive and marine applications.

References

Alcock B, Cabrera N.O , Barkoula N.M, Wang Z , Peijs T, “The effect of temperature and strain rate on the impact
performance of recyclable all-polypropylene composites”, Composites Part B: 39; 537–547; (2008).
Bryan Harris. “Engineering Composite Materials”. The Institute of materials, London (1999).Cantwell W.J, Mortont
J, “The Impact resistance of composite materials-a review”, Composites; Vol 22,347-362 ;( 1991).
Ferreira J.A.M, Costa J.D.M, Reis P.N.B, “Static and fatigue behaviour of glass-fibre-reinforced polypropylene
composites”, Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics 31; 67-74(1999).
Gilat A, Goldberg RK and Roberts GD. “Experimental study of strain-rate-dependent behaviour of carbon/epoxy
composite” Composites Science and Technology 62:1469–1476(2002)
Haider Al-Zubaidy, Xiao-Ling Zhao and Riadh Al-Mihaidi. “Mechanical behaviour of Normal modulus Carbon
Fibre Reinforced Polymer (CFRP) and Epoxy under Impact Tensile Loads” Procedia Engineering 10:2453-
2458(2011).
Hao yan, Caglar Oskay, Arun Krishnan, Luoyu Roy Xu. “Compression-after-impact response of woven fiber-
reinforced composites”.Composite science and technology (2010).
Hashin Z. “Analysis of Composite Materials”, Journal of Applied Mechanics, Vol-50; 481-505 ;( 1983).
Hopkinson B. “A method of measuring the pressure produced in the detonation of high explosives or by the impact
of bullets”. Phil Trans R Soc Lond A 213:437–456(1914).
Hosur MV, Alexander J and Vaidya UK. “High strain rate compression of carbon/epoxy laminates composites”
Composite Structures; 52:405–417(2001).
Koerber H, Xavier J, Camanho P.P, “High strain rate characterisation of unidirectional carbon-epoxy IM7-8552 in
transverse compression and in-plane shear using digital Image correlation”. Mechanics of Materials 42; 1004–
1019; (2010).
Mahmood M.Shokrieh and Majid Jamal Omidi. “Tension behaviour of unidirectional glass/epoxy composites under
different strain rates” Composite Structures 88:595-601(2009)
Mahmood M.Shokrieh and Majid Jamal Omidi. “Compressive response of glass–fiber reinforced polymeric
composites to increasing compressive strain rates” Composite Structures 89:517-523(2009)
1418 C. Elanchezhian et al. / Procedia Materials Science 6 (2014) 1405 – 1418

Marcus Schobig, Christian Bierogel, Wolfgang Grellmann, Thomas Mecklenburg. “Mechanical behaviour of glass
fiber reinforced thermoplastic materials under high strain rates”. Polymer Testing 27; 893-900. (2008).
Ninan L, Tsai J and Sun CT. “Use of split Hopkinson pressure bar for testing off-axis composites” International
Journal of Impact Engineering 25:291–313 (2001).
Ochola RO,Marcus K, Nurick GN and Franz T. “Mechanical behaviour of glass and carbon fibre reinforced
composites at varying strain rates” Composite Structures 63;455-467 (2004)
Peijs T, Smets E.A.M, Govaert L.E. “Strain rate and Temperature effects on energy absorption of polyethylene
fibers and composites”. Applied composite materials 1:35-54;(1994).
Reis J.M.L, Coelho J.L.V, Monteiro A.H and Costa Mattos H.S.da. “Tensile behaviour of glass/epoxy laminates at
varying strain rates and temperatures” Composites Part B 43:2041-2046(2012)
Yuan Qinlua, Li Yulonga, Li Hejunb, Li Shupingb and Guo Lingjunb. “Quasi-static and dynamic compressive
fracture behaviour of carbon/carbon composites” Carbon 46:699-670 (2008).
Zhen wang, Yuanxin Zhou, Mallick P.K. “Effects of Temperature and strain rate on the Tensile behaviour of short
fiber reinforced polyamide-6”.Polymer composites: Vol.23, No.5, 858-871 ;( 2002).